Constructivism 
Author Message
 Constructivism


I am convinced me even more strongly than before that there is no such
thing as objective reality.
 That is unfortunate.
Quote:
>What other kind of "reality" is there?  Well, there's constructed reality,
>of course.

 It sounds like you have been reading George Kelly's "The Psychology of
Personal Constructs", where he presents the basis for individuals
construing or constructing their own private worlds.
Why does it have to be either/or. My understanding of maple syrup may be
"the only kind of syrup worth eating." Your understanding of it may be "way
too expensive for the taste." Both understandings are constructed based on
our prior experiences and our personal preferences. Both are equally valid,
as are the myriad other understandings we have of our intersecting worlds.
 Yes, but first there must be some maple syrup. Then in addition to the
maple syrup "out there", we have your construction of maple syrup, and my
construction of maple syrup. This raises the basic communication problem:
How do I get you to see my construction of maple syrup, and how do you get
me to see your construction of maple syrup?  Given the 5+ billion people
now on the planet, communication of constructed realities seems a
miraculous and fragile process.
Quote:
>Being lost in the deep dark woods, alone, one certainly needs "objective
>reality".

 George Kelly would use slightly different terminology: He would say that
you need a construction or hypothesis about trees and moss that maps rather
closely to the way trees and moss really grow.
I can't believe this is what makes learners. We learn all the time from
everything we do. Constructing our knowledge and our  understandings,
reinforcing, deepening and changing them, is a continual process.
 You have distilled the essence of Kelly's Personal Construct Psychology,
that we are all learning all of the time... He called each of us a personal
scientist, reflecting his view that we are constantly making and testing
hypothesis and updating our beliefs based on the results of those
experiments about the world and others so as to better anticipate future
events and encounters.
I think the quality of our learning may change as we gain experiences. We
may have more memorys and more connections we can make to other previous
experiences. But learning (or not) is not based on the number of
experiences we've had.
 Agreed, It is rather what we construed or hypothesized or generalized from
those experienced that makes all the difference.  Bob  In addition to the
Reality of events, is the reality of each individuals "Construction" or
perhaps Interpretation of those events. We all see Common Events through
our own individual Filters. - Bob Gorman < http://www.*-*-*.com/
eudora="autourl"> http://www.*-*-*.com/
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

LogoForum messages are archived at:
< http://www.*-*-*.com/ ;
http://www.*-*-*.com/

  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
< http://www.*-*-*.com/ ; Yahoo! Terms of Service.



Mon, 22 Nov 2004 10:36:13 GMT  
 Constructivism


Science and Reason >Paul R. Gross (Editor), Norman Levitt (Editor), Martin
W. Lewis (Editor) ... >  With >constructivism and variations of it, there
is the belief by some writers >that reason or logic, the very underpinning
of the scientific method, is >being discarded.
 The underpinning of the scientific method is Observation and
Experimentation NOT reason, logic, or other forms of pre-judged
authority...
(Sigh.)  How people learn really is a different question from what is the
nature of reality.
 True.
Thought experiment:  Suppose you believe that kids learn by being taught.
Now think about the poor kids in <insert name of some country whose
government you don't like>, where the kids are taught horrible propaganda
instead of truth.  Don't you think *those* kids' understanding of reality
is socially constructed?  If you think that, are you abandoning reason and
logic?  If those kids' learning is socially constructed, then all kids'
learning is socially constructed.
 This is the 10th of George Kelly' 11 corollaries to his fundamental
postulate.  Commonality Corollary: To the extent that one person employs a
construction of experience which is similar to that employed by another,
his psychological processes are similar to those of the other person.  Bob
In addition to the Reality of events, is the reality of each individuals
"Construction" or perhaps Interpretation of those events. We all see Common
Events through our own individual Filters. - Bob Gorman
<http://www.kncell.org/  eudora="autourl">http://www.kncell.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

LogoForum messages are archived at:
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LogoForum>
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LogoForum

  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Yahoo! Terms of Service.



Mon, 22 Nov 2004 10:37:08 GMT  
 Constructivism
 is there a web site where I could read some of  George Kelly's works?
Paul Kosuth


Science and Reason >Paul R. Gross (Editor), Norman Levitt (Editor), Martin
W. Lewis (Editor) ... >  With >constructivism and variations of it, there
is the belief by some writers >that reason or logic, the very underpinning
of the scientific method, is >being discarded.

The underpinning of the scientific method is Observation and
Experimentation NOT reason, logic, or other forms of pre-judged
authority...  
(Sigh.)  How people learn really is a different question from what is the
nature of reality.

True.  
Thought experiment:  Suppose you believe that kids learn by being taught.
Now think about the poor kids in <insert name of some country whose
government you don't like>, where the kids are taught horrible propaganda
instead of truth.  Don't you think *those* kids' understanding of reality
is socially constructed?  If you think that, are you abandoning reason and
logic?  If those kids' learning is socially constructed, then all kids'
learning is socially constructed.

This is the 10th of George Kelly' 11 corollaries to his fundamental postulate.
Commonality Corollary: To the extent that one person employs a construction
of experience which is similar to that employed by another, his
psychological processes are similar to those of the other person.
Bob
In addition to the Reality of events, is the reality of each individuals
"Construction" or perhaps Interpretation of those events. We all see Common
Events through our own individual Filters. - BobGorman
<http://www.kncell.org/  eudora="autourl">http://www.kncell.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LogoForum>
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LogoForum    
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Yahoo!Terms of Service.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

LogoForum messages are archived at:
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LogoForum>
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LogoForum

  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Yahoo! Terms of Service.



Mon, 22 Nov 2004 10:37:42 GMT  
 Constructivism

Psychology of > Personal Constructs", where he presents the basis for
individuals construing > or  constructing their own private worlds.

    No, but maybe I  should. My beliefs are outgrowths of Gestalt
Psychology, an artist named Ge{*filter*}  Keppes who wrote "The Language of
Vision" and who pioneered the use of  camouflage to protect US cities from
possible bombing by the Germans in WWII,  brain research that points out
(nearly endlessly) how adept the brain is in  "filling in the gaps in" (by
making up) data supplied by our imperfect sensory  organs as we make sense
of the world around us, shaman religions which state  that reality is
basically a dream, and quantum physics which states the same  thing.    >
Given the  5+ billion people now on the planet, communication of
constructed > realities seems a miraculous and fragile  process. If you're
arguing for an objective reality, this  argument sounds a little too close,
for my comfort, to the reasoning used  to support creationism over natural
selection.   But it really doesn't matter. We each can think  whatever we
want and still the universe will be what it is. Of greater concern  to me
are the possible ramifications these different philosophies may have for
teaching and learning. It seems like the objective reality camp will lean
more  toward one-right-answer and acceptance of an objective knowledge of
the  objective reality. If I were an objective realist (?) I would have a
hard time  accepting the whole idea of constructivism where we construct a
personal  knowledge that is different for each individual.   Tom  
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

LogoForum messages are archived at:
< http://www.*-*-*.com/ ;
http://www.*-*-*.com/

  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
< http://www.*-*-*.com/ ; Yahoo! Terms of Service.



Mon, 22 Nov 2004 10:38:34 GMT  
 Constructivism

Quote:
> is there a web site where I could read some of  George Kelly's works?

Paul, while you are waiting for a better answer do a search with
http://www.google.com on "George Kelly".   For instance:
http://www.ship.edu/~cgboeree/kelly.html

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

LogoForum messages are archived at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LogoForum

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



Mon, 22 Nov 2004 10:39:00 GMT  
 Constructivism

My beliefs are outgrowths of Gestalt Psychology, an artist named Ge{*filter*}
Keppes who wrote "The Language of Vision" and who pioneered the use of
camouflage to protect US cities from possible bombing by the Germans in
WWII, brain research that points out (nearly endlessly) how adept the brain
is in "filling in the gaps in" (by making up) data supplied by our
imperfect sensory organs as we make sense of the world around us,
 This "filling in the gaps in" reminds me of a program I had in BASIC many
years ago for memorizing poems. You present the poem on the screen and read
it once. Then you repaint it minus 10 % of the letters (chosen randomly).
You keep repeating this, deleting another 10% each time. By the 10th round,
or usually before, you will have memorized the poem.  It should be fairly
straightforward to program in Logo. You need a fixed width font, which was
the only thing available back in the DOS 25x80 days :-)  Bob P.S. I think I
just recently saw something similar, perhaps it was on one of the math
sites I frequent. A mind once stretched, will never return to its original

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

LogoForum messages are archived at:
< http://www.*-*-*.com/ ;
http://www.*-*-*.com/

  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
< http://www.*-*-*.com/ ; Yahoo! Terms of Service.



Mon, 22 Nov 2004 10:48:08 GMT  
 Constructivism

Quote:
> is there a web site where I could read some of  George Kelly's works?
>Paul, while you are waiting for a better answer do a search with
><http://www.google.com/  eudora="autourl">http://www.google.com on "George
>Kelly".   For instance: <http://www.ship.edu/~cgboeree/kelly.html
>eudora="autourl">http://www.ship.edu/~cgboeree/kelly.html

 Dale, you did it again! Found a super-reference.  I've been studying
Kelly's approach for many years, have gone to several of the international
conferences, given & taken 1000's of his rep-tests and at the moment I'm
re-reading the main tome George Kelly's two volume Psychology of Personal
Constructs (1955). I'm on page 532 of 1218.   Thanks to your reference, I
will probably only skim Vol 2.  I was about to post several pointers, but
none of them is as succinct, and clear as the one you found. It's author C.
George  Boeree has an amazingly clear style, and I followed the pointer in
the middle of your reference to his course on qualitative methods. It's
great too! At the beginning of that page he summarizes why I don't like
many traditional analysis techniques much better than I had myself.  Bear
of Little Brain has found another pot of delicious Honey!  Thanks.  Bob

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

LogoForum messages are archived at:
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LogoForum>
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LogoForum

  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Yahoo! Terms of Service.



Mon, 22 Nov 2004 10:49:07 GMT  
 Constructivism

you repaint > it  minus 10 % of the letters (chosen randomly). You keep
repeating  this, > deleting another 10% each time. By the 10th round, or
usually  before, you > will  have memorized the poem.  That's an
interesting concept. I wonder how large  the text passage can be. I'll have
to try it. The filling in of gaps I refer to  is slightly different because
the brain literally makes stuff up to fill in the  missing parts. It isn't
that we're trying to remember something that was once  there. It has to do
with making out the figures below to be a rectangle and a  triangle even
though they are just dots (hope they turn out ok):   . .  .               .
.    .            .    . . .  .           . . .  .   Another example is the
blind spot we all have in each eye, but in normal  seeing, we don't realize
we have a blind spot. In truth, we each have a great  many blind spots but
our wonderful brains fill in the gaps in our vision and  produce a
continuous image. Tom
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

LogoForum messages are archived at:
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LogoForum>
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LogoForum

  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Yahoo! Terms of Service.



Mon, 22 Nov 2004 13:02:42 GMT  
 
 [ 8 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. Inspiring vs. Selling Constructivism

2. Inspiring vs Selling of Constructivism

3. Fwd: [LogoForum] Inspiring vs Selling of Constructivism

4. Constructivism

5. Constructivism

6. Constructivism in the real world

7. Constructivism

8. Constructivism

9. Constructivism

10. A testimony to Constructivism power...

11. Constructivism

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software